Court Orders Banana-Plantation Litigants to Address Potential Termination of Litigation

A California judge has reportedly ordered the parties to litigation over the exposure of banana-plantation workers to a pesticide that allegedly caused their sterility to explain why two lawsuits should not be dismissed as a sanction for the alleged misconduct of the plaintiffs and their lawyers. Mejia v. Dole, No. BC340049 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty.). In 2008, a jury awarded six Nicaraguan workers $5.8 million in damages in the first of several such cases to be tried in the United States; the court reduced the verdict by half, and the case is on appeal.

Thereafter, the defendant began filing the depositions of Nicaraguan witnesses who claimed that (i) some of the plaintiffs had never worked on banana farms, (ii) work certificates and lab reports had been falsified, and (iii) some of the plaintiffs have children, despite their sterility claims. The court reportedly stayed the personal-injury lawsuits and ordered a separate trial on the fraud charges, but, in March 2009, decided not to conduct that trial because of concerns over witness safety and orders to “beat” and “club” defendant’s investigators in Nicaragua.

The court has also apparently allowed depositions to be taken of the plaintiffs’ law firm employees, citing the crime-fraud exception to attorney-client privilege. Law Professor Lester Brickman remarked on the rarity of sanctions such as termination of litigation for attorney misconduct and law firm depositions, saying this could indicate “the court thought the lawyers had a significant role in creating this scheme.”
See Law.com, March 24, 2009.